A gallery exhibition of works by artist Makoto Aida has been denounced as “sexist child pornography,” after its depictions of nude quadruple amputees wearing dog collars inflamed the sensibilities of feminist anti-pornography crusaders.

The “Tensai de Gomen Nasai” (or “Monument for Nothing,” as its English subtitle runs) exhibition consists of some 100 works by 47-year-old ero-guro artist Makoto Aida, including both paintings and sculpture, and is said to be the first time his more provocative works have been exhibited in a public gallery setting.

The exhibition itself, held at Roppongi’s prestigious Mori Art Museum, opened in November and runs until the end of March, with details and an English language page available on the museum’s official site.

However, the “Society for Considering Porn Victims and Sexual Violence,” a group including local university teaching staff and women’s shelter staff amongst its members, has in a letter to the gallery called for the exhibition to be banned, denouncing it in the best traditions of feminist academia as “not only being brutal child pornography, but as exceedingly vile sexism also being discrimination against victims of sexism as well.”

The gallery says it “cannot comment as it is still deciding how to respond,” but already suggests “people who find works of this nature distasteful may wish to refrain from attending the exhibition,” and also restricts minors from viewing the more provocative works.

Not surprisingly, it is his depictions of “daruma” quadruple amputees wearing nothing but dog collars which seem to have provoked this latest assault on artistic freedom, although his works are rather more varied:

265 Comments

Has the artist stated the subjects are meant to be jailbait? How old were his models? One thing about Japanese women is that it can be hard to tell how old they are :-/ A lot of ’em just seem to stop aging at some point and don’t start again till they hit retirement age.. And frequently don’t exactly have large tits.

So that means that these could be paintings of 30 year old women for all we know, and the raging feminists are actually upset because the quad-amputee subjects are still hotter than their butt ugly selves.

That is my personal theory on why loli’s are so popular in Japan… Even they can’t tell the difference between a 15yo and a 30yo <,<

fantastic artwork. I wish I could draw so good. I feel bad for those against any form of artistic expression of which none has been hurt for the sake of. I wouldn’t butcher a horse to paint it -that’s what imagination and a good sense of anatomy is good for.
Antagonists are always misguided, in this aspect, it’s as though the artist is casting a spell upon men, driving them to abuse women. Here in ‘Murica, this is refered to as ‘Witchhunting,” and it survives to this day under many different names, and linked to censorship.
Governments are malleable in regards to defining laws; justice is blind. What needs to be done to protect free expression, is to fight against that superstitious and cowardly lobbies that seek to stretch the boundaries of reality and fantasy. They are the ones who live in chains, and chains are what they want for the rest of us.

Wow… I’m not really surprised, but Aida is one of the best and respected artists in Japan at the moment… I bet if Aida was a woman, the feminists would have celebrated these works has feminism.

I’m all for equal rights on such, but it really would be a revolutionary change if feminists for once would do something different than just kicking men in the nuts. Scary that their influence goes way beyond than just art.

I’d be more bothered if the gallery didn’t seem primed to rightly tell them to fuck off. There will always be people who look to intentionally restrain the freedom of speech, and there will always be those who unknowingly do so for selfish, or self-righteous reasons. We will never be rid of them, and thus the battle to preserve freedom of expression will always persist.

All we can do is stand strong beside what we believe in, just as the censors seem to be doing, and shout loud enough that our voices may be heard.

This is why I’ve felt so sorry for Japan lately. It is a people so obsessed with cooperation that they willingly surrender their personal purpose and ideals for the betterment of the community, paradoxically weakening the culture by silencing another of its voices in the process. I just hope their masses realize that this isn’t the right way before it destroys them.

Sometimes I figure feminists do themselves more harm than good when they protest stuff like this. Even if you find it “distasteful”, the technical skill involved is without question. It’s not “sexists” or “child porn” it’s just fairly disturbing work by a good artist.

I’m a feminist. I think these pictures are quite beautiful and I don’t find them sexist at all.
So many ‘feminists’ give feminism a bad name. Reak feminism isnt anything like the crap that Sankaku likes to pretend is regular feminism. Most real feminists have no problem with this kind of artwork, and if they do, they’d just think ‘whatever’.

Do you know Anita Sarkeesian? She is feminist who happen to have problem with how woman are treated in video games

She even criticize rescuing Princess Peaches in Mario game as sexist and making woman look weak. If she play Mario, she would know that there are Mario game where you can select Princess Peach as your playable character instead of Mario. So the inequality thing is not true, and she get like $160,000 for that.

She criticize some other game too, and she never play any of the game. She only take some random quote/screenshot from the game that look “sexist”, and start complaining how woman are treated as weak being in the game.

She is not even a gamer but talking about the game inequality like she know better than other people that actually playing it.

Judging by this incident, it not hard to believe the people from same group demand a piece of art as sexist, and want a ban for it.

Many feminist said they demand an equality, and you know what? I am 100% sure that nobody are going to complain if the art is naked man get mutilated..

The guro stuff almost made me throw up, but honestly it’s not actually directly harming anyone so banning it would be a breach on artistic freedom.
It would be better if stuff like this wasn’t shown in art galleries though, much better kept in the dark murky regions of the Internet.

I’m just surprised that these were featured in a physical gallery to begin with. It’s easy to see how these could be outrageous, but I guess it’s also easy for people to forget that subject matter does not always equal real-world problems/attractions/what have you. If they were photographs, perhaps I could see the outrage.
Personally, I really like the painting of the girl who’s part matches up with the field’s path. That is brilliant, technically and visually.

If he can put this up, I think it is safe to say I could make a bunch of dismembered penises eaten by the by the quadriplegic guro girls while the men get anally raped by tentacle monsters. Now that is art.

What’s art? Isn’t it something that can draw different perspectives and is an expression of value? I just want to know what his message is. Because what does someone say with a smiling quadruple amputee crawling on the snow like a dog wearing a dog color towards a snowman suppose to inspire? Solve the issue by publicizing a warning about what the series contains and be done with it.

for once i agree with feminists. yes defend the freedom of art to display such themes. just as the NRA is defending weapons without caring who dies.
Art freedom should be supported when it speaks of universal truths, and gives voice to those that have none. but works that inly influence already deranged minds isn’t something we should be supporting.

sry, i’ll try to be considerate, but art that speaks only universal truths would quite possibly be the most boring thing to ever exist or ever will exist(and of course that’s just my opinion). art is what it is today because it’s debatable, because everyone takes away something slightly different from it. can you say you KNOW he was only thinking evil, deranged and perverted things when he made these? i could give you 1000 guesses and 3 days to tell me what he was thinking, and chances are you would be wrong, and I’m not any different.

oh and by the way, the NRA doesn’t defend your right to kill people, they defend your right to shoot back.

” the NRA doesn’t defend your right to kill people, they defend your right to shoot back.”

That’s what they SAY. But their actions, even if you think they are morally correct, have the impact of, in fact, making it easier for people to get guns they shouldn’t and kill people.

So what they DO contributes greatly to gun violence, even if you somehow believe they have nothing but the best of intentions.

The ATF? Leaderless and hamstrung because of the NRA lobby. The CDC? Cannot even research the statistics and effects of guns in the country because the NRA lobby has managed to prevent them from being funded if they do so. The NRA opposes even the mildest, most reasonable restrictions on gun ownership.

Saying the NRA defends one’s right to shoot back is a glib bit of sidestepping, avoiding the fact that they ALSO do their damndest to make sure nobody prevents anyone from shooting at you in the first place.

@13:50
listen, if someone REALLY wants something, and has the money, they can get it, regardless of ATF, customs, or any other government agency for that matter. so come back to me after your family gets kidnapped, murdered and then raped by a drug cartel with black market assault weapons, and all you have to fight back with is your “legal” revolver, because that’s what anti-gun activists are going for. im not saying everyone should have rpgs and .50 MG’s, but if someone who was gonna rob you heard or saw that you had one, id BET they would think twice about it.

Shima-kun989, if I am “retarded” for not buying the NRA line and making the case against it, then you share as much for, as you say, “bringing them into it”. I am not the original Octopi poster, and I generally (from what I’ve read) take a stance more like yours on the freedom of speech issue.

Octopi has a valid point that the supporters of free speech tend to defend it even at the cost of supposed “harm” like offending people (or groups of people) and making them upset. What he/she doesn’t seem to realize is that another person’s offense is not a valid justification for censorship – or any other kind of retaliation, except perhaps for more speech from a differing viewpoint.

But the NRA, when they oppose any limitation on guns whatsoever, even to the point of censoring investigation into the effects of guns on society, could indeed be considered negligent – or naive – or uncaring – about how their policies likely have increased the chances of gun-related fatalities.

Even free speech has its limits – such as yelling “Fire” in a crowded theater, or producing real-life child pornography – that is, cases where the exercise of free speech directly harms another person. (Libel and slander are similar examples.)

But just making someone feel icky or upset does not (should not) qualify as the kind of “harm” that negates free speech.

Similarly, the 2nd Amendment’s “right to bear arms” should not be absolute and unfettered, and when there is a definitive link to real harm against people involved, some limitations on that right can be imposed.

There’s art, then there’s art. Some’s actual art trying to make a point, even if the point is just a sort of visual treat. Then there’s just proactive bullshit meant just to piss people off and create controversy. That isn’t art so much as some guy saying Look at me! Look at me! See how pissed I made you! Tee hee! I think stuff like this just falls into that category and we can do without it.

That’s just your interpretation of the pieces. So let me guess, are you one of the people pissed off? Are you so pissed off that you can’t see the value in this piece as art? You’ve done well to see the tree grasshopper, but you’ve failed to notice the forest.

These same Feminists who cry “sexism”, “Patriarchy”, “misogyny”, and whatever else sort of crap they say, are no doubt huge fans of Valerie Solanas. They probably have her S.C.U.M. Manifesto proudly displayed on their bookshelf, defending it as “academic research”.

Just when you think you’ve lost all your faith in humanity, that little bit of faith that was left hidden away dies.

I’ve seen a couple of his shows here in Japan…he’s from Niigata, so he had a showing there last year. And a few weeks ago I saw this exhibition in Roppongi. It’s sometimes interesting, but often times very obvious. I’m surprised Sankaku didn’t run the photo of the giant onigiri head character crapping gold.

ok #11 scare me… basically and that girl with no limbs walking made me say without thinking, “Doesn’t that hurt?” unfortunately my sister was right there and thought i was watching porn.. and i said “CLOSE! its sankakucomplex.”

Art is supposed to be beautiful. That garbage is atrocious to even look at. Artistic license aside, I don’t think a public gallery should display such disgusting crap. If someone wants to call that “art” and keep it to themselves where no-one can see it, that’s cool with me.

I’m a woman, and I’m all for feminism – I really am, but I kind of fail to see the issue here with these pictures? I love this artist’s work, I think these people are just getting worked up for no real reason.

The fact it is stirring such a reaction out of someone or a group of people is one great thing art does and I wouldn’t put it past the artist that he probably is happy to get such an emotional reaction.

On the other hand, just like this article says and like many comments on YouTube. If you don’t like the content, don’t watch the content. Derp.

I’d like to compare this movement with a documentary I’ve watched late last year called “Architecture of Doom”, which at some moment says how Hitler banned art that depicted ugly people and people with disabilities, saying how it was degrading and not fit to culture standards.
You don’t have to like this sort of thing to defend the artist’s freedom to make it.
In fact, this is what art is all about. Some of the most significant revolutions out there started with an artist’s expression of something that society have shunned. Critics can make their own judgements about it, but never to censor.

They’ll bite anything that depicts young girls or lolis to any extent, won’t they?
God, these bitter femnazis are the worst living beings on Earth, haven’t they noticed that they have long reached the pinnacle of what feminists’ goals were back even a century ago, and are now way past anything they hoped for?
If things continue the way they are, it’s not unlikely men have come up with their own faction to get equality.

Art isn’t supposed to do anything. Art is a form of expression by the author. How it affects people doesn’t matter. Anything with a deep vested idea beyond pure practical functionality is art, even if it’s just the design of a washing machine.

Damn right it’s art.
If some people dislike it or if it really is beyond the point.
It is also retarded how they justify censorship by calling it “discriminatory”.
How the fuck can a damn paint be discriminatory?
Can a painting say “Gee you can watch me, but you over there can’t” ?
How the fuck can a thing that does nothing “discriminte”.
It’s like some people don’t remember that the word means stuff like “blacks to the back of the bus” or “women can’t vote” instead of “shit that I don’t like”.
Fucking worst justification to ban art or media.

Your argument hinges on the idea that somehow, people going to a public exhibition ought to be protected from seeing anything they might not want to see.

In a free society, you do not have such a right.

You either have to argue that suppressing things is good – in which case you had best be prepared for when something you like becomes offensive to another person, because what you like very well may be next to be banned – OR, you have to allow for people to say and display things you might find objectionable, regardless of what the majority may think, in order to allow for freedom of expression for all.

If you cannot get behind this concept, then you are not for freedom, and the terrorists win.

Moreover, making art safe and tolerable is the quickest way to make it irrelevant. You sneer at the ideas you think “degrade” art, but it is actually you who degrades art by attempting to tame it and make it conform to your personal ideals.

I believe there should be adequate warnings about the content anywhere you might see it so that you have the choice of not seeing something that can not be unseen.

This way people will be able to shelter themselves and their children from such content.

I personally think this kind of content is sick, disgusting and offensive to me as a human. And I think I have the right to avoid such things and not have them shown to me(like sankaku just did by making one of the pictures visible on the front page), but I do not have the right to prevent others form looking at such thing if they so desire.

@12:52
“appreciation” of art has nothing to do with harboring good will or feelings towards art, dumbass.
it’s about getting inside the artist/authors head and swimming around for a bit. “what made him think like this?” “why did he draw it this way?” “what was going on in his head?” “what kind of message was he trying to send?”
whatever answers you find, you may not like all of them, but does that degrade any of its value? No.
So, go back inside your little bubble and stay there where no one will find you, you sheltered dumb fuck.

You guys are obviously the ones that are not thinking. If you look at it the other way, you could also say “You are showing these to the people, and they don’t like them, so don’t exhibit them.”

Things are censored because the society cannot accept them, and in this case, I can see why many people are uncomfortable with his works. Always remember, when you hold an exhibition, you are not making a play in your own head, you are SHOWING these things to people.

So much for the “appreciation” of art, calling it a “chellenge” and something that is supposed to “piss you off”. On the surface, it looks like you guys are protecting art, but beneath that shallow layer, you are actually degrading it with your ignorance.

What if this isn’t just a fetish thing though? What if the message is that women are crippled by society, constantly looked down upon as being inferior to men, not able to be hired for a job as easily and earning less pay even when they are? It’s painted in such a way that makes it seem offensive and grotesque, but society is offensive and grotesque, after all. When you look at it from that perspective, this is actually feminist artwork. I don’t see what the big deal is.

The big deal is that they want to feel good about themselves by patting themselves on the back. They don’t want to actually DO anything about sexism or child porn, they just want to feel like they are doing something.

Oooh, good one! They should read this, maybe then they’ll realize that art is simply in the eye of the beholder and that you can take it for what you want it to be. Which means they want it to be sexist and are a bunch of whiners.

That said, I actually understand the argument for banning it if that wasn’t the sole intention. It really is rather disrespectful. You can make the argument for freedom of expression, for technical competence, for “you don’t have to see it if you don’t like it”, but in essence its display in a high art institution glorifies the subject and makes it socially acceptable.

And while simply nude women isn’t offensive – see basically every Renaissance painting – or even amputees, or a collar, all of them together, plus clearly tentacle-inspired hentai like #8?

Unless it’s *exactly* for the reason stated above by 05:42, I don’t think this belongs in an art gallery.

let’s just say for a second that YOUR work was on display at a showing, and somebody was trying to say you didnt deserve to be there… how would you feel?
if it was me, i’d go right up to the guy and break his fucking nose and say, “I worked hard to get here, what the fuck can you say?”
regardless of content or quality, he has just as much right to have his art displayed as anyone else in the world, because someone, somewhere, saw his hard work.

I think you’re missing the point of the previous poster. Was referring to the subject matter and comparing it to artworks already on display that have nudity on it, with hentai. This has nothing to do with an angry artist demanding their artwork remain uncensored.

I do have to disagree with the part about art making subject matter socially acceptable. Trends make things socially acceptable. Art by itself just has to invoke emotions, feelings, thoughts, etc. Art appreciation comes in many forms.

You’re obviously not an art critic so don’t even pretend to try and be one. You realize that for something to be labeled art it generally has to have no possible, actual use right? Also, it has to evoke emotions in the viewer. Another point, most art is designed to make you interpret the artwork in your own way.

Note that last part. Art is made to make you think – to make you come to your own conclusions about it regardless of what the artist’s intent was on the subject matter. What you’re suggesting is the complete opposite – that unless the artist had the intent you wanted him to have it’s not art, which is completely and utterly assbackwards.

That is why one of the first pieces of “modern” art was quite literally shit in a tin can.

So it would’ve been a-ok if it was a man quadruple amputee, is what they are saying. While I personally wouldn’t call this “art”, and it’s in extremely bad taste, you can’t just go spew nonsense like that.

The irony about feminism is, that its inherently sexist. The name already implies it and their actions more than confirm it.

And the members usually are really bad sexists who don’t even realize they do as bad or even worse things than those they claim to be against.

And if anyone thinks thats not true then name on action any feminist group did on behalf of men who are discriminated against today in most western countries on a daily basis. Be it in front of the law (women get less sentences for the same or worse offenses), children’s custody (custody usually goes to the women) to society in general (men have to put up with sexist comments made about them and being ridiculed and put down publicly in the media that any feminist group would have going wild were it about women).

And the irony to that is that if a man dares to speak up he gets put down as a weekling or “unmanly” and that he should “man up” or take it like a man or other hilariously ridiculous things like that.

Therefore all those sexist feminists get from me is the middle finger and a hearty SHUT THE FUCK UP.

what makes me mad about that, isnt that he was actually convicted for that, but that it was HIS WIFE that snitched on him. the one person who is supposed to have your back through thick and thin, AND SHE STABBED HIM IN THE BACK.
i mean i could understand if she wanted to divorce him, or talk to him about it, or even seek treatment, but to literally fuck someone over in the system, that’s worse than cheating, murder, AND stealing from him.

@14:56
and right now he’s getting repeatedly sexually assaulted in prison, does that help? I think it would be a trigger to make him do something in the future, after he gets out and fucks up her life.

Sorry, plenty of erotic artist had done expose event in America. Many featured messed up hardcore materials. Yeah, some people get offended and protested. But they always get slapped by the 1st amendment. and these event always goes on without a hitch.

say what you want about Americans, they take 1st amendment very very seriously. why do you think the feminists had to go after the little guys over sea instead of tackling the American porn industry, which’s probably the biggest in the world? They always lose whenever they tried.

Try again, many famous erotic artists had gallery expose in America all the time, some feature really messed up hardcore shits. And they always went on without a hitch. Yes, some moralfag always get offended and protested to have these events shut down. But they always get bitch slapped by the 1st amendment.

Say what you want about American, they take 1st amendment very seriously, even more so than the 2nd. Why do you think instead of going after the American porn industry(arguably the largest in the world), feminazis had to go after the little guys oversea instead? That’s right, cause they get curbstomped by the constitution everytime they tried to start shit on porn.

His work is very influenced by guro hentai manga (thank you, Captain Obvious?), which shocks me to the point I can’t stand it. But technically is excellent and the exhibition is shocking and very modern at the same time.

Besides the point. He wasn’t saying he could paint better. He was saying that in this age there are thousands of other artists whose works and talents equal or far surpass many high flying gallery artists, yet are totally unknown of by “the art community”. The “art world” is mainly a maze of social networking and publicity.

Also the things that are shocking and provoking to some, seem common place and mundane by the average internet hermits standards.

But they trying! The copy of Michelangelo’s David
in the Victoria and Albert Museum in London had a detachable fig leaf so Queen Victoria wouldn’t have to see Davids “pee pee” which she found shocking! Lol!

I like the works of Makoto Aida actually and once almost bought on of his compilations, but was put off by the price. Artistic freedom shouldn’t be restricted as long as nobody gets hurt by it and drawn girls can’t. What about all the lolicon stuff? They haven’t done anything about that either. If they want to ban this, they just just do it on the way. Excuse my poor english.

I hate guro personally, and I don’t even like lolis, but if guro (especially this stuff) should be banned then so should the artworks depicting hell and judgement day, with all their gore porn and nudity…

I agree, if it was men/boys with collars(and four limb amputee) you wouldn’t hear a thing from these people/women…

But personally I don’t really find the artwork being anything special and I’m definetly not into guro but I could say about the same for most art… I do like the title though: “monument for nothing”, fits perfectly.

Yep. Then we humans stopped being hunter/gatherers and, with the men home more often, stopped being discriminated against by the female leaders/oppressors by taking over the traditionally female-only leadership roles.

But yeah, if this art had been about naked quad-amputee boys/teen boys wearing dog collars or having their brains blown out, the feminazi-ists would be declaring “This is the perfect world order: Men as ottomans!”

Actually, that “art” [read: porn] is pretty crappy “technically” compared to the works of far better quality we have right here in SanCom.

And the subject matter is fine, and nothing new, it just belongs on the internet as porn, not at a gallery as high art.

So yes, it should be banned… in high art galleries. This guy doesn’t deserve an ounce of praise for his mediocre porn with recycled subject matter just because he try to pass his works off as high art in galleries, unlike everyone else who compete fairly.

I’m gonna take the middle ground and say that all the anime style work on sankaku is just as good as these paintings, it’s just different. In a perfect world, all of it would be acceptable in a respected art gallery, regardless of what the majority thinks of it’s subject matter.

I’m being quite serious here when I say that art can also be acceptable if it causes an emotional response in my pants. It’s still a valid emotional response.

That’s an interesting point. So where does one draw the line between porn/smut and artwork?

I disagree with you calling it “shitty below average netporn.” If you ask me, I think you came here with the wrong expectations and maybe failed wanking off to it? idk. There’s obviously some thought into how the art is conveyed through the imagery. People who see this, only looking for porn like you, will only ever see the sexual value in it.

this artist has a VISION and the WILL to actualize it. that’s why this is in a museum. it’s cohesive and approachable even if it’s shocking. he’s taken it to the next level in forming a discourse and communicating with the audience, like it or not. the capacity to provoke angry feminists aside, look at all the people talking about this with such fluency on fucking sancom as though it “really” matters?

There is no limitation of Japan male’s exploration of torturing femails,that could be the reason Japan’s economy will eventually sink to the bottom of pacific ocean.that’s where their fucking wicked ancestors coming from.

how can this not be moe. didn’t you play katawa shoujo? and pic 11 reminds me of that joke from zetsubou sensei where kitsu chiri was saying something like “the line that cuts the difference between us is here” or something like that.

That’s how ignorant people react. They call something “bad” by using the biggest and scariest terms they can. That’s why so many people have no idea what phrases like “sexism” or “child pornography” really mean, because they just mean “I don’t like it, and want it banned.”

what id like to know is, how da fsck can they call this child pornagraphy? did they fucking ask the dude “how old are the people in these pictures?”
FUCK NO!
did they ask the dude “Do you hate women?”
FUCK NO!
so tell these stupid fucks to go check themselves into the fucking looney bin with their paranoid, ego-centric delusions, and get fucking zombified with happy pills until they cant string together a coherent thought.
this is the modern world, people can do whatever the fuck they want to.

The point isnt whether or not they asked him its that these works of art are fictional and projections of his own mind, which no one should have the right to censor. Those girls could have had “im three years old” stamped on their DFC but it could never be child pornography, because those girls are FICTIONAL. Not one child was abused in the making of thi art (to our knowledge), so all facsist pigs who call this sexist cp can sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up.

@12:41
basically, what i was trying to say, is that they believe they think the “right” way, and that they have the right to tell other people how to think, because they think the “right” way, which if you ask me, is completely delusional.
to activists, its not the subject matter that’s important, it’s their ability to exert control over the way other people think and act.
which unfortunately, the government(all governments) seems to be emulating.

the way i see it, any time anything is banned, it impedes the advance of civilization. it only allows another group to advance further, while youre stuck sitting with your thumb up your ass, and generally it’s not beneficial to the earth as a whole. new, shocking, disturbing, offending, or “bad” things come with advancing culture, and by getting rid of those things, rather than making them better or fixing them, we are only impeding our own growth.

the young children (almost babies) these days using ipads and computers and smartphones as if it was completely natural, do you think it would be like that if computer use was limited, or controlled? no, we’d all still be banging two rocks together to try to make a phone call.

i dont see a problem with this
ppl will complain about anything so no surprises there
other than the collar fetish which i dont mind since its just a drawing, everything looks nice with some kind of weird appeal that i like

A work of art cannot be sexist by its very nature, by its definition, since it does not impose restrictions on the freedoms of any gender.

Well, maybe if it was a game that only women or only men were allowed to play, then it’d be sexist, but mere despiction cannot be.

These feminists just prove how retarded they are.
If they are angry or offended they should get back at that guy and make cruel pictures of him instead instead of hating on art and freedoms and missusing words.

Need a better example? OK Think of what your favorite art/pron in the world is. Now, me and 10,000 brainwashed idiots have just decided that it’s the most disgusting and vile thing on Earth and we wont stop until it’s destroyed. Now other than a few people like you no one else really cares about it.

So, now what? Say they get away with censoring this, what’s to stop them from doing it again to something you like?

Young virile girls, not children, but mutilated… Not make mighty sword rise… Shakes head, uggg…

But force “Modern” concept through head. “Free Speech” that if people say bad thing can say bad thing and get away with it, people who say “Good Bad Thing” that is good/true thing others don’t like because are evil or afraid/unaware of bad thing can’t stop.

Woman scream this bad. Understand woman wince at imagery, me too… But some of those women women the great one warned are “Modern women who seek to destroy men” or as a classic writer said “Hyenas in Petticoats” who just want hate man agenda.

Yeah. It’s been denounced as sexist child pornography because it *is* sexist child pornography. I’ve heard all the drawings aren’t porn arguments and often I agree with them, but in this case it’s absolutely clear what’s going on in the mind of the artist and it isn’t pretty.
What is scary to me is that although I tend to be on the most liberal application of freedom of speech side, when I read this article I understood the complaints against the exhibition and I couldn’t understand why it was still open. I think it’s the advocating violence against women aspect of the exhibition that’s crossing the line.